[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-437301-105":59,"doc-detail-437301-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":123,"head_meta":125,"extra_data":127,"updated_unix":129},105,"en","airwater-pollution-report-air-quality-conference-sponsors-proclaim-success-cont","AIR/WATER pollution report - AIR Quality Conference Sponsors Proclaim Success (Cont.)","","Analysis of the Air Quality Conference and surrounding debates on the Clean Air Act in the 96th Congress. The text contrasts expectations that legislation would remain untouched until 1981 with conference claims of success and potential pathways to revisions. It outlines three recurring pressure categories: major legal changes, complaints against EPA administration, and renewed disputes over emissions offsets, fixed deadlines, and penalties. Sponsors argue for more rational implementation, while opponents cite corporate influence and call for environmental protection.",{"@graph":69,"@context":122},[70,84,105],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":35,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/healthcare/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/airwater-pollution-report-air-quality-conference-sponsors-proclaim-success-cont/437301/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/airwater-pollution-report-air-quality-conference-sponsors-proclaim-success-cont/437301.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Jiven","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-11-08","2026-09-29",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":44},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",{"@type":106,"mainEntity":107},"FAQPage",[108,114,118],{"name":109,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":111},"Why did some media predictions claim Congress would not reopen the Clean Air Act until after 1981?","Question",{"text":112,"@type":113},"The text cites misunderstandings about the act’s authorization and interprets that principal subcommittees and key agencies were reluctant to change the law before 1981, while other groups wanted to maintain the status quo.","Answer",{"name":115,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":116},"What three main categories did forum complaints and business-labor disputes fall into?",{"text":117,"@type":113},"They were grouped as: (1) major legal changes, including rejection of the “no risk” theory and cost-benefit standards; (2) anti-EPA complaints about relaxing ambient standards and increasing flexibility; (3) re-fighting old wars, including ending emissions offsets and addressing fixed deadlines and penalties.",{"name":119,"@type":110,"acceptedAnswer":120},"What strategy did conference sponsors say they would pursue to achieve changes?",{"text":121,"@type":113},"Sponsors indicated a four-pronged strategy, beginning with duplicating the conference in other parts of the nation to reshape the Clean Air Act’s image and influence how it is perceived.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":124,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":126,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":128,"site_id":62},437301,1791077288,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":131},{"doc_id":128,"user_id":132,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":34,"category_name":35,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":44,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":24,"language":139,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":140,"faqs":141,"seo_title":142,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":143,"read_time":144,"preview_page_count":4},1099513958607,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/100002390cf8733938c?x-image-process=image/resize,m_fixed,w_180,h_180&k=1778829742770036399","“..there is virtually no chance that Congress will reopen up the act for more amendmentsbefore 1981”(Business Week,Jan.29,1979).  \nOne can be sure only that:some industries would like to change the law,or at least extendsome deadlines;the principal legislative subcommittees are loathe to touch it before 1981;environ-mental groups and the EPA would like to maintain the status quo,but the agency's handling of cer-tain decisions could intensify pressure for Congressional action sometime in 1979 or 1980.  \nThe ESC Weekly Bulletin,a well-known Capitol Hill tout sheet,recently predicted clean air legis-lation in this Congress through a misreading of the law.As it later acknowledged,ESC thought theact's current authorization ended in 1980-meaning,essentially,that Congress would have to voteon some sort of clean air bill by then,if only a simple extension,to keep EPA programs running.In fact,however,the act's authorization runs until 1981.  \nAware of this,Business Week reported (in a story headlined \"The Clean Air Act:No ChangesComing”)that the law would almost certainly go untouched by Congressional hands until 1981.Atthe same time,the magazine summarily declared a failure the“air quality conference”held lastmonth in San Francisco by a consortium of California trade and labor groups and the AmericanPetroleum Institute(A/WPR,Jan.22,1979,p.33).BW's latter judgment apparently was based onthe misapprehension that all of the conference's sponsors wanted to pressure our Washington law-makers to make immediate and widespread changes in the air act.  \n# Lust for Legislative Battle\n\nDiscussions during the two-day forum often meandered and lacked cohesiveness,but business andlabor complaints could generally be lumped into three main categories:(1)The Need For Major LegalChanges,including explicit rejection of the “no risk”theory,with standards set on a cost-benefitbasis and environmental standard-setting and enforcement separated into different agencies;(2)Anti-EPA Gripes,with charges that the agency should relax all ambient standards and administer the lawwith more \"flexibility;\"(3)Re-Fighting Old Wars,including pleas to eliminate the emissions offsetpolicy,fixed deadlines,PSD increments and noncompliance penalties.  \n(Continued on following page)  \n# AIR/WATER pollution report\n\n## ACTION IN THE 96TH CONGRESS?\n\n-\"The Clean Air Act,substantially rewritten in 1977 after a long and bitter fight,will becoming back to haunt this Congress.The only question is which session”(Environmental Study Con-ference Weekly Bulletin,\"Outlook for Environmental and Energy Legislation in the 96th Congress\").  \n**乖  \nThe 96th Congress is scarcely three weeks old,but much has already been written-and evenmore said-about prospects for amending the Clean Air Act before the current Congress expires in1980.As is usual with such augury,our media soothsayers have been plagued by certain misinforma-tion or misinterpretation of events.The simple fact is that no one knows for certain what,if any-thing,this Congress will do with the air act.  \nTo be sure,some of the conference participants lusted,as one put it,to “march on Washington”at once to demand air act revisions.Others were content,however,simply to begin sowing seeds ofdiscontent with the law,even if that meant the legislative harvest could not be reaped until 1981 or1982.And it appeared that most of the approximately 350 conference participants and observers,in the words of one businessman enjoying the respite from the eastern winter,\"came out here sim-ply to find out what the heck is going on,what everybody is thinking.”  \nAir Mail delivery).Additional copies mailed in the same envelopefor $97.50 per year.Second class postage paid at Silver Spring,Maryland.Printed in the U.S.A.C1979 by Business PublishersInc.  \nAIR/WATER pollution report_  \n## Air Quality Conference Sponsors Proclaim Success(Cont.)\n\nBelying BW's conclusions,conference sponsors proclaimed the confab a smashing success and saidit could pave the way f","cbCait9udpkDIL5q","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCait9udpkDIL5q","pdf",2199528,"English","# Lust for Legislative Battle\n# AIR/WATER pollution report\n## ACTION IN THE 96TH CONGRESS?\n## Air Quality Conference Sponsors Proclaim Success (Cont.)","[{\"question\":\"Why did some media predictions claim Congress would not reopen the Clean Air Act until after 1981?\",\"answer\":\"The text cites misunderstandings about the act’s authorization and interprets that principal subcommittees and key agencies were reluctant to change the law before 1981, while other groups wanted to maintain the status quo.\"},{\"question\":\"What three main categories did forum complaints and business-labor disputes fall into?\",\"answer\":\"They were grouped as: (1) major legal changes, including rejection of the “no risk” theory and cost-benefit standards; (2) anti-EPA complaints about relaxing ambient standards and increasing flexibility; (3) re-fighting old wars, including ending emissions offsets and addressing fixed deadlines and penalties.\"},{\"question\":\"What strategy did conference sponsors say they would pursue to achieve changes?\",\"answer\":\"Sponsors indicated a four-pronged strategy, beginning with duplicating the conference in other parts of the nation to reshape the Clean Air Act’s image and influence how it is perceived.\"}]","AIR/WATER pollution report - AIR Quality Conference Sponsors Proclaim Success (Cont.) | PDF",1790681012,13]